I thought you were going to say “wrinkly (something else).” Foreheads works, though.
Yes! The Democrats–and the Obama Administration, in particular–need to stay on this, educate the general public … just like President Obama always does, in a calm, cool and clear manner. Most people aren’t as dumb as the GOP leadership seem to think.
If GOP wins the presidency it is very unlikely that Democrats will regain a majority in the Senate.
I dunno if anybody, even they themselves, could find their “wrinkly (something elses)”. They certainly haven’t been able to find same in the past six years of kowtowing to their psychotic base.
1 Like
“Hi, Mitch? Barack. Listen, just thought I’d reach out. Stop being a f*cking jerk. OK, gimme a call back. Thanks, bye.”
Steviedee–You ARE living to see it happen. Maybe not the tipping point, but each of your first 5 sentences is happening NOW. Hallelujah! (in the most secular sense)
2 Likes
But Obama seems to be moving right ahead with the process even as he tries to assuage the concerns of his detractors in the Republican Party. As Earnest noted, both Grassley and McConnell voted to confirm Justice Anthony Kennedy in the final year of Ronald Reagan’s presidency.
“There is a clear precedent here,” Earnest said.
It’s hard to sum up the President’s intentions and actions in one sentence, so I hope this isn’t quite accurate. Obama can’t ‘assuage the concerns’ of GOP leaders since their concerns are that a Democratic president name a Supreme Court justice, period. They don’t care about precedent or convention or logic. Saying that the President is trying to work out the issue honestly with Republicans makes it seem like they have a shred of an argument in favor of refusing to consider nominations, which they don’t.
He[The President] shall have the Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Councils, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
<#readitmitch>
Why does it always seem like Democrats all got D grades in Marketing 101? Here is what you need to say:
-
66 Million voters already-weighed in and said Obama gets to choose a nominee until at least 11/2016 - you are dishonoring the majority of Americans who made that choice with any suggestion otherwise.
-
You are dishonoring the Constitution with any suggestion otherwise.
-
You are dishonoring the English language, all political history and the Constitution by suggesting that a President who is 75% into his term is a “Lame Duck”. Lame Duck doesn’t even apply do a President until after about 96% of the term.
Leading Republicans are being juvenile, facetious, slimy and dishonest. There is no harm in using these terms when they are true.
1 Like
True. But I hope to see permanent 65-35 Senate majorities, House majorities, religion contained within the church and home. Imagine a political campaign where a candidate is quizzed about his/her religious views and replies “It’s none of your damned business” and still wins the election.
I wish 2016 Mitch McConnell would head the arguments of this 1970 Mitch McConnell law review article he penned:
9 Likes
Well that, my friend, is paradise.
1 Like
“Lame duck President”? that’s true on the first day of any President’s second term. So are Mitch & Chuck seriously proposing that no President can nominate anyone to fill a vacancy during their entire second term??
And I’m still curious, has anyone asked these GOPers how many Supreme Court vacancies need to occur before the Senate should do something this year?
1 Like
I don’t wish death on anyone, but what would happen if one of the other “older” supreme court justices died? Would the GOP continue to obstruct the nominees? I don’t know the answer, but it’s an interesting question.
Depends on which political side the justice was on for these naked partisans. There is no integrity in any Republican politician.
If Obama died the Republicans would have to point out the electorate deserved a say in his successor and demand Biden stay put in the Naval Observatory. You know, since there is no precedent for a Vice-President assuming office on the death of the President. No really, no need to check. Fox News was told so, they’ll be repeating it hourly. Hasn’t happened in 80 years. Trust us. Hey, no fair Googling!!
And the GOPigs, with their foreign Cubanadian ruler leading the way, answer the call and do their Constitutional duty:
2 Likes
Can’t wait for the nominee to land in these guy’s laps —
squirm … squirm
